June 28, 2010 at 5:00 pm in INFORUM
WASHINGTON, D.C. Supporters of a plan to build a $1.46 billion Red River diversion heard mixed messages at two Monday hearings.
Tags: Cass County, Clay County, Diversion, Fargo, Flood, Moorhead, Politics, Red River 5 Comments »
A question. Does the timeline mean that North Dakota has to have an actual commitment to provide money in place by July 15?
Or can the Governor just give a speach saying there will money and that is good enough?
I realize that articles are written in general ways, but I don’t see how there can be an actual solid commitment to funding by July 15.
Like or Dislike: 7 1
I realize the flooding of the river is quite regular and difficult to maintain. The question I have is what is the cost of this versus the cost of other projects, like building a higher dike or simply sandbagging every year? I don’t understand why Devils Lake and the catastrophe that they are currently experiencing is less important for that area. It seems that they have a current problem that is only getting worse every year with the rise of their like and no real outlet for the water. THere is currently water over the road and houses are under water. I live in Fargo and have helped fight the flood but it seems that the city has been able to handle it with our current methods. A billion plus dollar investment to an area that is handling the flood seems like overspending. Doesn’t Devils Lake have a greater problem? Where is the state’s support of that area? Let’s just buy out the rich homes along the river, relocate and build up a dike or put a secondary dike. That has to be much less expensive and costly for area farmers, who will be the ones sacrificing their land for a diversion.
Like or Dislike: 11 12
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
A river diversion makes more sense, just like in GF; they put up this huge wide dike and took out all these house and parks and for what, now all the other towns are getting backed up with water, the awesome parks are gone, so are the houses. If every town puts up a dike the farmers are going to get flooded in-between the cities. Might as well divert the water to one location and sacrifice one huge area than to have several lands that are flooded.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 1 11
The land is flat. For those that are for building dikes, where does the water go? Once again the land is flat! So the water will pool around the city entrance and exits (Highway’s). We just need to divert the water. Wasting money is building larger dikes, is fruitless and makes no sense in a flat land state. Diversion is the only option, if you disagree with this, come up with a solution, what will work? Larger dikes don’t, everything floods, even the Highways get flooded the water has to go somewhere because our land is FLAT! hello does anybody get this?
Like or Dislike: 6 9
yes, our land is flat. My point is that we are making it work, temporarily. Ultimately, we just need to pray for a drought for a couple years, let the soil dry up, and then the flooding may cease. Also, isn’t Devils Lake in much worse shape? There is water currently over the roads and houses currently under water. I know that Fargo is much bigger but DL is still an ND town not really getting any publicity, or as much as the diversion. Suffer the flood, for a couple years, and focus on the other areas of ND that need more help. Maybe bigger dikes aren’t the answer but a billion dollar diversion over acres of farmland seems to be detrimental to the region as well. You have to give it to those stubborn farmers and land owners in the outlying areas – they won’t back down so easily. Democracy in action.
Like or Dislike: 2 0
Click here to cancel reply.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
To start connecting please log in first.
Topics is proudly provided by the Forum Communications Company